Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio disapproved Shamir Lee Coll’s pending application to register for admission to the Ohio bar because he failed to provide complete and timely information about traffic violations and other matters during the character-and-fitness process. The court permitted him to reapply for the July 2018 bar examination after submitting a new application and undergoing a complete character-and-fitness investigation.
Holdings
- An Ohio bar applicant must fully, honestly, and completely provide requested information and cooperate with the admissions process; failure to do so may constitute grounds for disapproval of the application.
- The determination of the necessity and relevance of information requested during the Ohio bar-admissions process is committed to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court of Ohio, not to the applicant.
- Payment of registration, bar-examination, and character-investigation fees does not discharge an applicant's obligation to make honest and complete disclosures during the admissions process.
- Coll failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he presently possessed the requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications for admission, so his pending application was disapproved.
- Coll may reapply for the July 2018 Ohio bar examination, provided that he files a new registration application and undergoes a complete character-and-fitness investigation, including an investigation and report by the NCBE.
Questions Presented
- Whether Coll failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he presently possessed the requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications for admission to practice law in Ohio.
- Whether an applicant's failure to provide complete, accurate, and timely responses to requested information in the bar-admissions process may support disapproval of the application.
- Whether the determination of the necessity and relevance of information requested during the admissions process is committed to the Supreme Court of Ohio rather than to the applicant.
- Whether Coll should be permitted to reapply for the July 2018 bar examination rather than the July 2019 examination recommended by the board.
Disposition
disapproved
Cases Cited (15)
- In re Application of Watson, 31 Ohio St. 3d 220, 509 N.E.2d 1240 (1987)(followed)
- Shimko v. Lobe, 103 Ohio St. 3d 59, 2004-Ohio-4202, 813 N.E.2d 669, ¶ 54(applied)
- In re Application of Zatik, 126 Ohio St. 3d 397, 2010-Ohio-3828, 934 N.E.2d 335, ¶ 8(applied)
- In re Application of Steinhelfer, 142 Ohio St. 3d 120, 2015-Ohio-978, 28 N.E.3d 107(compared)
- In re Application of Baudendistel, 141 Ohio St. 3d 101, 2014-Ohio-5200, 21 N.E.3d 1063(compared)
- In re Application of Grimsley, 141 Ohio St. 3d 94, 2014-Ohio-5033, 21 N.E.3d 1057(compared)
- In re Application of Blackwell, 116 Ohio St. 3d 530, 2007-Ohio-6041, 880 N.E.2d 886, ¶ 32(applied in dissent)
- In re Application of Bonetti, 117 Ohio St. 3d 113, 2008-Ohio-503, 881 N.E.2d 1249, ¶ 9(applied in dissent)
- In re Application of Corrigan, 47 Ohio St. 3d 32, 546 N.E.2d 1315 (1989)(applied in dissent)
- In re Application of Davis, 38 Ohio St. 2d 273, 313 N.E.2d 363 (1974)(applied in dissent)
Showing top 10 of 15.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…